Specifications:Fast enough for shooting in just about any type of light.
Distortion-free images with superb resolution and color rendition.
An ideal first lens, perfect for full-length portraits, travel photography or any type of available-light shooting. Accepts 52mm filters.

I own both a 85 1.4 AF-D and the 85 1.8 D and the 1.8 is not far behind the 1.4 and is easier to focus, it's size makes it much easier to store and carry than the 1.4 and makes it a great "everyday lens"
A all around great lens, good bokeh at 1.8, very sharp stopped down the 2.2, the 1.4 is not worth the elevated price over this lens

Jul 31, 2015

Mark KOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 15, 2003Location: ChinaPosts: 205

Review Date: Jul 15, 2013

Recommend? no |
Price paid: $249.99
| Rating: 5

Pros:

Inexpensive, light weight, fast

Cons:

faint colour, less contrasty,

Having owned Minolta 50/1.7, 50/2.8 Sony 50/1.4, Canon 50/1.4, 50/2.5, I came to my own conclusion that all 50mm lenses are super buy with good quality and feather light weight.
After websurfing for months, I came to my own Nikon 50. This one came to me as surprises. The first was its price. The second was its build quality and the last was its optical quality.

It is not sharp unless you step down to f4.0. Unlike Sony/Canon counterparts, the colour is very faint and contrast very low. I suspect this must be the same in all the D lenses I have....from 20/2.8, 85/1.8, 85/1.4 to 105/2.8 macro.

I have to admit digital cameras have bought us new challenges in lens quality and only a few legend can survive. Obviously this one is not

Jul 15, 2013

OskarOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 16, 2012Location: AustraliaPosts: 0

Review Date: Dec 25, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Light fast sharp cheep

Cons:

There are none

The most underrated lens on the market , blows most so called fast lens out of the water one of the few lens I have that actually perform across all numbers , I have been able to get a sharp point at 1.4 unlike other lens that have to be set at 2.8 up to get anything sharp , why makers put such inaccurate claims is a joke why pay money for under f 2 ratings
When all you can get is a soft image , that aside why pay big money for a brag sized 50 to go with a 30 pocket vest when you can buy this gem for peanuts , stick it on a D3 or D800 and you have a lethal weapon .

Dec 25, 2012

paparazzinickOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 8, 2005Location: United StatesPosts: 7624

Review Date: Nov 12, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $100.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

sharp

Cons:

again, like the other 50mm, it needs fine tuning in camera

One of my go to lenses of all time. I look shooting weddings in Pittsburgh with this lens. To view some images taken with it, check out my site. A lot of the images on the site were taken with it http://nbombichstudios.com

Nov 12, 2012

E.KaseOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 12, 2012Location: United StatesPosts: 2

Review Date: Apr 7, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Sharp, great for low light

Cons:

Focusing will be a little bothersome if you're used to SW lens, not as fast and doesn't seem as accurate

This is a super sharp lens, esp from 2 up. Plenty good wide open though. It is great for portaits, I prefer it over any other. Focus is a drag compared to new silent motor lenses, but it does the job. Nikon 50's are great, and I prefer this to my 35 1.8 DX because of the extra speed and lack of distortion. They're cheap on the used market which is great. Build quality seems good, but these lenses seem like they could be sealed up better to keep from haze/fungus. But really, this is a great lens purely for its IQ.

Apr 7, 2012

wolfbreathOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 4, 2012Location: United StatesPosts: 0

Review Date: Feb 17, 2012

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Great combo of speed and image quality.

Cons:

Color is not horrible, but a little dull compared to a couple other lenses

This lens has some great quality. I use it all the time for anything... daily photography, food, portraits, events, travel etc.

Open wide, it's sharp. It's sharper than most other lenses I tried, including the 1.8d. Depth of field is pretty smooth. Bokeh looks good, but it isn't creamy like the longer telephoto lengths.

I only have one minor issue. For some reason mine seems to have a little bit dull color rendition compared to my other lenses (except 85mm 1.8d). It's not horrible (it's not even bad), but I have enough experience with it to be knit-picky. This is not an issue for portraits, because I turn down saturation. I like to bump up saturation on the camera settings for other types of pics anyway, so it's no big deal.

Anyhow, I'm overall pleased with this lens's quality and performance. It's great. I highly recommend it, especially over the 1.8D.

Feb 17, 2012

jessi74OfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 22, 2008Location: United StatesPosts: 3

Review Date: Nov 5, 2011

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $200.00
| Rating: 7

Pros:

Cons:

Nov 5, 2011

Marc de WitOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 3, 2010Location: NetherlandsPosts: 0

Review Date: Feb 25, 2011

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Fast AF , sharp wide open , bokeh

Cons:

None

This lens is a musthave for each Nikon shooter.
Fast AF . Supercomfortable lightweight yet very allround especially on FF
Very nice bokeh
Fantastic sharpness starting at 2.0 but allready very good at 1.4
Out of 10 shots at 1.4 really 5 or 6 are keepers.
Compared to my very expensive 24-70mm I rate this little monster AAA+
Buying this lens will never end up in a disappointment , if it does then you probably have a bad one , just return it for another .

Feb 25, 2011

macvolkzOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 9, 2011Location: CanadaPosts: 0

Review Date: Feb 9, 2011

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $270.00
| Rating: 9

Pros:

very light to carry, easy to use, my copy is sharp @ 1.4 (2.0 and above, very sharp)

Cons:

hunts a little in very low-light condition but not a problem

Feb 9, 2011

VandergazeOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 19, 2010Location: GermanyPosts: 0

Review Date: Jun 10, 2010

Recommend? no |
Price paid: $270.00
| Rating: 6

Pros:

a benjamin cheaper than the af-s, pretty sharp from f2.8 onward on APS-C

Cons:

way too soft at 1.4, cheap plasticy quality

Price is no genius...optics aren't overly great or suck either

Jun 10, 2010

phiggysOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 7, 2004Location: United KingdomPosts: 25

Review Date: Aug 28, 2008

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9

Pros:

Speed and extra light gathering power beautiful Bokeh wide open.

Cons:

I have owned a number of 50mm f1.8 versions which IMO are sharper with more contrast

This AFN lens came with a Nikon FM2n I purchased.
And a friend was after a 50mm for his D70 so I sold my AFN 50mm f1.8 to him. "Wish I had kept it now though"

Aug 28, 2008

lextalionisOfflineImage Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 28, 2007Location: United StatesPosts: 1076

Review Date: Apr 17, 2008

Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $290.00
| Rating: 10

Pros:

Built like a "real" scientific piece of equipment, sharp, fast!

Cons:

A little pricy, but you get what you pay for.

If I was to compare this lens with the 1.8 NIKKOR on overall, construction, and image quality I would only give the 1.8 a 9 on construction quality. If you are serious about your NIKKORs, then this lens is worth the extra $$ for a small margin of performance and a good margin of build quality.

There must be some sample variation on this model so I guess some caution may be in order for having return ability in case your copy doesn't match up. On my copy the center is very sharp in the center and all over by f2......I don't think it's a freak as others have reported this kind of good result. The contrast beat the pants off of a copy of the f1.8 I sent back for this....and glad I did. The build IMHO is considerably better as well. There is a small amount of flare possible if not being careful shooting wide open, but I've found by f2.0 its a non issue. I have found it to be very accurate in focus as well as being instant to lock with my D300 body. I hesitated to consider this lens over the 1.8, but I can vouch (for my copy anyway) this is a wise move for the long term. It is clearly superior to the 1.8.......not as close as I thought it would be........and this is a good thiing...

This is a recent copy of the venerable 50mm 1.4, and was made in China. Now I've owned other lenses made in China such that were excellent, but in the higher priced Nikon glass I'm surprised to see this. I've also in the past used a Japan-made 50mm 1.8.

The lens is sharp enough for what I do wide open, and just excellent when stopped down. I'm normally burning or blurring the edges and cropping in from the 4 x 6 Dslr ratio to a 4x5 print ratio, so a bit of softness at the eges is not of concern to me and what there is has not been objectionable. The color rendition has the snap and contrast you expect in Nikon's pro line, and is, to my eye, nicer than the 1.8 I have. But that may depend on the user's preference.

Build quality is not what I expected from Nikon. The manual focus is not very smooth. I also use a fairly light Lindahl lens hood in the studio, and the auto-focus mechanism of this 50mm and the D200 can't handle focusing with the hood, I think due to the added weight of the hood. I don't have this problem with the 85 1.8, 80-200, or 20-35 that I also use.

If you are purchasing from a camera store, I would reccomend trying several samples from the shelf and make sure you get one with smooth manual operation, and maybe shoot a few test images to make sure your copy went through good quality control. I didn't do this, but will on all future Nikon purchases.

In high key settings I've found the lens a bit prone to flare. When it's not just been poor light placement on my part, it's been due to brightness on the white background causing the flare. Adjusting the lighting to proper ratios solves the issue, but the 50mm has more flare than my 85 or 20-35.

Outside or in low light, I can't say enough good things about the images I get with this lens. For those of you who still use a D100, as i often do, try this lens on the D100 in low light and high ISO's. The D100's low light performance may surprise you (especially if you were a fan of the high ISO BW films from Ilford and Kodak).